Changing Stereotypes

Satrapi's use of sarcasm in both the film and graphic novel bring lightness and comedy to some very heavy topics and help her . After 9/11 and other terrorist attacks, many nations and people generalized their opinions of the small fundamentalist group that planned and executed the attacks, to describe all Muslims of the world. Marjane's ability to exaggerate the appearances and feelings of others, as well as her own appearance and feelings humanizses the characters and enables her audience to better relate to them. In doing so, she is able to seperate Muslims and those from Iran from the small fundamentalist groups that gave all Muslims the negative stereotype. By making this clear separation, she is able to portray how the majority of citizens of Iran are in fact victims, and not murderers. She is able to show how all of the nation suffered. By showing this she enables her audience to empathize with a nation they once had looked upon with disgust and disdain.
Cailee- #

Motion Picture or Graphic Novel??

Similar to Sarah, thus far I am unable to decide whether I enjoyed reading the book more than I enjoyed watching the motion picture. This is the first instance where I have experienced this kind of dilemma; I have always preferred the book over the movie based on it. This is normally because the movie is lacking in details. More specifically, I feel I am unable to gain insight about the characters' thoughts and feelings in a movie version; whereas in the book, these elements are abundant. The thoughts and feelings of the characters' are an integral component of any story, therefore when a movie is lacking in these areas, it becomes difficult to extract the same meanings and insight that the book depicts.

It is difficult for a motion picture to portray these fundamental components that comprise the book. Where an author can narrate a characters complete reaction to an event, person etc; a character in a movie can only use his actions and dialogue to portray this same reaction. However, in the motion picture, "The Complete Persepolis," Marjane is able to narrate her own feelings and reactions. She is also able to better depict the reactions of others through her narrations and through the animations. Her use of sarcasm and exaggeration enable Satrapi to clearly illustrate her thoughts, as well as the thoughts of other characters. For example, when Marjane catches her boyfriend cheating; she uses sarcasm in her images and word choice to literally paint a picture of her feelings to the audience. She portrays him in the the exact opposite way she did earlier in the motion picture. Instead of being romantic and loving, he becomes a disgusting, lazy pig. This exaggeration helps the audience to understand her feelings at this time in a way a movie cannot. Instances like this help the audience to gain insight in order to better understand the important themes of the film.
Cailee J- #

Majane's life on the big screen

After reading the comic book version of "The Complete Persepolis" I got the full picture of what was going on in Iran and how the whole country viewed what was going on. When Marjane moved out of Iran and into Europe for the most part you could see her thoughts and words, but could not really get the way she sounded. You had to use your imagination as to how she sounded in her expressions.
Putting things in motion for the comic book into a movie really helped to get a better picture of how Satrapi wanted things displayed in my mind at least. I could see the way she really sounded and the humor she involved in her story. It didn't really change much from book to movie just made it easier to understand the actual tone of the story.
Post 1 Kevin Ostempowski

Marjane in motion

I feel as if the movie did an excellent job of portraying every single aspect about Marjane. It may have even done a better job than the book itself. Usually it is nowhere even near close to that being the case, but since the book was a graphic novel in the first place, it seems as if the movie had to do a better job, because it puts more motion into play. This leads to many more observations being made about characters reactions and emotions.
Not only does it lead to more observable characters, but now their emotions dont have to be exaggerated as much in order to get the point across. What I mean by that, is that in graphic novels and comic books the emotions on the characters face, and their over all posture presents their feeling to the reader. Usually, in order to assure that it is clear what emotion the character is feeling at the time they make their expressions extreme. In the movie however this is not necessary, because the characters can show full movements, giving them opportunity to be more natural and subtle about how they actually feel while still easily showing what's actually going on in their minds.

Which is Better?

This is one instance where I actually can’t decide if I like the book or the movie better. Usually I always side with the book, mostly because I find that it has more detail than the movies. But in this instance, both the movie and the book have positive and negative qualities.

The book is wonderful. I loved it, once I got into the storyline, and got used to the different style of the graphic novel. I actually feel that the book was better as a storyline. It seemed to flow better, even though the stories were the same in the movie. I expect movies to have some sort of transition between the different scenes, but this movie really seemed to jump around. This jumping around during the scenes could be Satrapi reminiscing about her childhood. Memories like that never seem to flow in a coherent manner. We are just observers looking in on a woman’s memories of her traumatic childhood. Another thing I liked about the book more than the movie was more detail into her adolescence and young adulthood. I feel like the movie really focused on the details in her childhood, and not so much her time in Europe, and her time in the university. The book was more detailed about her life, while the movie, like most movies, had to cut things out, most likely for time reasons. Another thing I like about the book is that the still images of all of the soldiers, and other frames where it is one figure used over and over are more dramatic as still images. The movie takes away a little bit of the striking quality of the still images.

I also like the movie better than the book for different reasons. As a design student, I really liked the fact that they left the childhood memories in black and white, while the present Satrapi sitting in the airport is in color. It gives a sense of drama to the war scenes from her childhood, while also lending an idea of Satrapi not remembering them in all their detail. She remembers what happened in them, but not well enough to remember the colors of the scene. This happens to everyone. Memories tend to get foggy or faded after long periods of time. I like that they brought that idea into the film. It really gives a sense of reality to the whole thing. Another thing that I liked about the movie more than the book is that the movie allows the characters to become more real. The characters are now able to move around, and show better facial expressions. This allows the audience to better understand exactly how the characters are feeling. In the book, we can get a general idea of how the characters are feeling, but the animation allows Satrapi to show minuscule signs in the facial expressions of the characters that really tell us exactly how they are feeling.

So far the movie has done a good job of imparting the story line, and I can’t wait to see the rest of it!

(Sarah Jaworowicz, Post 23)

Motion Picture Novel

"The Complete Persepolis" was an enlightening book that displayed the harsh conditions in which Marjane Satrapi had to endure while growing up the Middel East. To read about the events that took place was one thing, but to actually view it in movie format helped to bring more life to the story. The characters are now given a voice and can represent their feelings in a more direct demonstration opposed to the novel. The movie itself seems more interesting and eventful, and really allows for Satrapi's character to be more clear. The actions taken forth by many of the characters bring more raw emotion and allow for the events in the story to be expressed with greater detail. The horrible actions that took place in Satrapi's country really show that her life was full of twists and turns, and it must have been hard to endure the strict limitations that were placed upon the woman such as always wearing a veil in public. The military factions and the jailing of innocent people were terrible situations in which Satrapi dealt with on a regular basis. I cannot even fathom having to witness something like that each and everyday. I think the movie does these events justice, because it actually shows what happens with sound and detail, rather than simply reading it and not understanding what is happening.

Upon viewing the film, I noticed that all the events that took place in her early childhood were in black and white. I thought this was interesting, because it showed how long ago Satrapi's childhood must seem to her, like looking at photographs of one's grandparents from the 1930s. She seemed to grow up so fast only leaving her past behind with memories of the war and the death and destruction that had embodied that portion of her life. As she grew older, the film transitioned to color, thereby representing the present day, and almost like it was a fresh new start to her life. Her present life is free from war and the military that had destroyed much of her early childhood. She is now an adult woman and ready to start a new chapter in her life.
(David Roberts, Post 23)

Marjane's vision

I enjoyed the novel a lot I thought it was very enlightening to what has gone on in the middle east through the eyes of someone who lived there. I don't know if I'm a visual person or media loving person, but I'm enjoying the movie more. I feel it pushes the envelope but in cynical way that makes it funny. Actually seeing the characters moving around and giving them a voice instead of reading the words on a page I think make more of an impact. You get more of an understanding of what the characters are going through and see more of the connections between each other.

I've never really been a fan of reading a book and then watching the movie on the book it never usually works out. I'll be honest when I saw we were watching the movie I was quite surprised that in an English class we'd be watching a movie on a book, but I'm glad we did. I loved that fact they kept many of the frames from the novel especially the scene where they black out a whole picture after she saw her friends bracelet. Overall great movie good book but either way enlightening.
Thomas Moss (final post)

Film vs. Graphic Novel

Well I would much rather read a graphic novel rather than a regular book when it comes to a topic with this level of importance because a graphic novel has pictures which convey meaning a lot better than words a lot of times. I did really enjoy reading Persepolis as a graphic novel because it definitely changes your viewpoint about Iran as a country and the citizens that live there. Since we started watching Persepolis as a movie today I think I am enjoying the movie more so than reading the graphic novel. The movie shows more of what is going on in Iran rather than just what Marijane is going through. The movie conveys more emotions than the book did. The movie shows more of Iran in general than the graphic novel did but I feel like the movie is missing parts of the story that the graphic novel had. These parts may be small but all parts seemed important within the graphic novel. I can't think of an example off hand it just seemed like we got to the point of her leaving Iran very quickly and missed a whole bunch of events in between. Still I am enjoying the movie and am glad we are not only reading the graphic novel but also watching the movie.
(Kelcey Summers 22)